How To Measure VC Content Against The Outcomes That Count

One of the biggest traps in VC content is chasing the wrong scoreboard.

The algorithms reward reach - views, likes, impressions - but in this asset class, reach doesn’t close funds.

The only two numbers that matter:

 1. Capital in (LP commitments).

2. Capital out (portfolio growth → exits).

Everything else - events, PR, podcasts, newsletters - is noise unless it moves those two numbers.

One of the best articulations of this reality I’ve seen is Cory Bolotsky’s VC Platform Impact Communication Framework. It’s a lens for platform role workers to check their work delivers for the people who matter

• LPs: Does it differentiate you enough to attract and close capital?

• Portfolio: Does it help companies grow and exit faster?

• GPs: Does it improve returns?

• Self: Does it make you indispensable?

But the question I want to push today is - with the 10+ year road to generate returns in this asset class…

Can you actually measure your marketing against those outcomes?

We can fall into a false sense of accomplishment if we are not looking for the right metric.

For example, while we have generated millions of impressions for GPs (REACH), the problem is if we are not tracking attribution to LP dollars or founders intros (DEPTH) then this is largely meaningless.

We therefore have to be careful where we are weighing popularity or reach with depth. As venture capital is a depth game.

This is of course the basics and very well covered by things like Kevin Kelly’s 1000 true fans but becomes a little more nuanced as venture sits inside of a two sided marketplace i.e LP capital attribution looks different from portfolio company support.

Are both possible?

Yes, sometimes. There are obviously well known examples - Harry Stebbings - signal of 20VC guest attracts the depth of the audience but the broadness of the business content generally creates reach.

The contrast in this case is Convective Capital (solely focused on wildfire technologies, yes wildfires!) whose content generates significant dealflow, but not the general reach. 

IMPACT = Trust > Quality > Reach

The 4 Attribution Levers

1. LP Capital Attribution

If your marketing can’t show a path from content → relationship → wire, then all the views and impressions in the world mean nothing. Attribution here proves whether content is doing the one thing it should - helping you raise.

• Direct: This year we ran a LinkedIn + content program for a GP. We could track that 23% of a round’s LP commitments came from new relationships formed via LinkedIn - with content explicitly referenced in intro calls - this was a 104x (10,317% ROI) return on their marketing investment.

  We can’t publish these examples publicly, but we do have permission to walk through them privately - including who the client is and the exact activities that drove the result.

If you’d like to learn more about that you can book a call here.

• Assist: An LP sits cold for six months. They engage with your market thesis post. That warms them enough to restart the conversation - and they commit in the next close.
  

• Track it: CRM tags for source of contact, UTM links in posts, note every touchpoint that leads to a wire.

2. Portfolio Company Support Attribution

Funds often forget this: marketing can (and should) compound value across the portfolio. The most tangible signals aren’t likes - but leads introduced, rounds raised, or key hires landed. If your marketing work only raises the profile of your firm, and not your portfolio companies as well, it can be wasted motion.

• Direct: Fund event generates 12 warm leads → founder closes 2 → ARR increases $120k → higher valuation → better exit potential.
  

• Assist: Partner content gets reshared in a thematic investor circle → direct intro → portfolio company raises next round faster.
  

• Track it: Don’t stop at “good vibes.” Look for signals: Are portfolio companies being mentioned by potential hires at interviews? Are your fund-hosted events deliberately bringing in ICPs (ideal customers) for portfolio sales? Is your thought leadership driving inbound interest from their customers? Build tracking loops - event RSVPs tagged by target ICP, content clicks cross-referenced with founder pipelines, and follow-up surveys to founders asking which fund activities directly opened doors.

3. Event Outcome Tracking

Events serve as a great ‘end’ for marketing. As getting people out of their houses for you is honestly one of the greatest indicators of trust i.e. your marketing.

But… Avoid vanity event metrics like RSVP counts. Did this event deepen trust and drive tangible outcomes? That means not just who showed up, but whether you captured their contact, engaged them afterward, and connected them into your portfolio or LP pipeline. The art is balancing depth vs. reach - small curated dinners may convert better than splashy 200-person events, but both have their place if you’re tracking the right outputs.

• Direct: 12 RSVPs for LP dinner → 3 first-time LP meetings → 1 commitments totalling $XM.

• Assist: 50 attendees at portfolio showcase → 5 customer intros delivered.

• Track it: Collect emails at registration, tag attendees by ICP (LP, potential customer, co-investor), and track post-event engagement. Ask: who booked follow-ups? Who entered your CRM? Which intros converted? Without this, you’re just throwing parties.

4. Content Interaction Signals

Content without engagement is noise.

But the hard part = you can put every control in place - tracking clicks, replies, conversions - and it’s still messy. Some content will pull 10x the views of everything else combined, but deliver no meaningful trust. Other pieces will flop on reach but quietly land you in the conversations that actually matter.

That’s why you need to think in layers:

• Direct: Newsletter → 22 LPs click a thesis post → 4 reply → 1 commits $1M that quarter. Clear, attributable, trackable.

• Assist: A partner’s “wide” post goes semi-viral. It doesn’t convert LPs directly, but it draws new eyes to the fund and makes future meetings warmer.

• Track it: The true metric isn’t views but Trust × Quality × Reach. Who are you reaching, how relevant are they, and how much do they believe you? That’s not in a dashboard - you piece it together. Did a potential LP reference your post in a meeting? Did a founder forward it to their peers? Would you be proud to drop it in your smartest group chat that is often a more reliable antenna than impressions.

The “Main Thing” Test is the real discipline you should have.

Before you approve a campaign, ask:

1. Can we link this to LP capital or portfolio company growth?

2. Do we have a system to measure that link?

3. If not - why are we doing it?

The reality of the game is the reality of the game:

If you can’t tie your marketing to capital in or capital out, you’re just playing dress-up.

Paul Graham talks about this in relation to startups, as “playing house,” but I have a friend in private equity who puts it even simpler - “Deals, debt, equity. If you’re not working on one of those… habibi, yalla habibi!”

Laurie, Refinery Media

If you made it all the way through, thanks so much for reading! A few hundred VCs now open this every week. If it’s helped you think differently about marketing, Venture, or storytelling, please send it to someone in your orbit.